National Dialogue Convention goes ahead after boycott by Mbeki, legacy foundations and GNU partners
Image: Supplied/GCIS
The first National Convention of the controversial National Dialogue will kick off on Friday in Pretoria, despite the withdrawal of former President Thabo Mbeki, several legacy foundations, Government of National Unity (GNU) partners, and civil society groups.
Several prominent foundations, including the Thabo Mbeki Foundation and the Desmond and Leah Tutu Legacy Foundation, have pulled out of the process over concerns regarding its implementation and rushed timelines.
The Democratic Alliance (DA), Freedom Front Plus (FF Plus), pulled out, accusing the ruling African National Congress (ANC) of using the dialogue to bolster its image ahead of the 2026 local government elections.
However, the ANC confirmed its participation in the event that will take place on Friday and Saturday, saying it supports the effort to build consensus and address the country's deepening socio-economic and political challenges.
'Our participation will be anchored in the values of the ANC, the resolutions of our National Conferences, and the current lived experiences of our people,' ANC national spokesperson Mahlengi Bengu-Motsiri said.
The ANC delegation will include secretary general Fikile Mbalula, national chairperson Gwede Mantashe, treasurer general Gwen Ramokgopa, and head of political education subcommittee David Mathura.
President Cyril Ramaphosa is expected to deliver the keynote address on Thursday at the event.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Ad loading
On Thursday, IOL News reported that President Cyril Ramaphosa, through presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya, responded to the criticism during a media briefing at the Union Buildings, saying the convention would proceed regardless of who attends.
'The show goes on,' Magwenya said. 'The National Convention is not the actual dialogue - it is a platform to set the agenda and map out the roadmap for the broader dialogue process.'
He said that the convention marks the beginning of a nine-month, nationwide engagement expected to reach communities, wards, districts, and various sectors of society.
'With all due respect, the seven foundations do not represent the majority of South Africans,' he said. 'This process belongs to the people, not the government or any single individual.'
Magwenya argued that the absence of legacy foundations such as the Steve Biko Foundation, the Oliver and Adelaide Tambo Foundation, and the Chief Albert Luthuli Foundation does not diminish the legitimacy of the process.
Last week on Friday, the seven foundations issued a joint statement announcing their withdrawal, citing concerns that what was originally envisioned as a citizen-led initiative had shifted towards government control.
Magwenya dismissed this claim, reiterating that the dialogue would not be defined by the attendance of a handful of organisations.
'It would have been great to have former President (Mbeki) there - but if he's not, he's not. South Africa is much bigger than any individual or single foundation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
eNCA
8 minutes ago
- eNCA
Leaders comment on National Dialogue opening
People sit next to a sign reading National Dialogue 2025 during the first National Convention at the University of South Africa (UNISA) in Pretoria on August 15, 2025.
Daily Maverick
24 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
The National Dialogue is going nowhere fast, and that's a great pity
The National Dialogue is dead, long live a national dialogue, or something to that effect… where or how to start such a dialogue, the lower-case one, is the next big task. We know that we have to talk, but we can't seem to agree on what to talk about, or whom to include in such talks. It's all rather bewildering. As mentioned previously, opposition to President Cyril Ramaphosa's initiative is, 'in one sense, a good thing', because it meant that people were engaging with the proposal, and that 'a measure of distrust of the government is always necessary'. In among it all lies the way forward, or rather 'a way forward'. For what it's worth, I remain convinced that the Diagnostic Overview of the National Development Plan is a good place to start, with the necessary updates, inclusions and adaptations. Opposition to Ramaphosa's National Dialogue has moved between positions of outright contempt, to self-dramatisation, bad faith and inauthenticity. Then again, it really was a stretch to imagine the Democratic Alliance, MK party and the EFF supporting anything put forward by Ramaphosa; they were, as they usually are, 'a little too precise, a little too rapid' in their response to the National Dialogue. My colleague Stephen Grootes used the term performative, which is a useful way of describing their responses. These political groups are, at least, consistent and have always presented themselves as indispensable for South Africa's future. Taking them at their word, they are the indispensables. The latest withdrawals will probably mean that the National Dialogue, in its current conception, will not start. The latest group of refuseniks who were meant to participate in preparations toward the National Dialogue have accused the president's initiative of rushing, of 'cutting corners' and of 'centralising power'. The latter is difficult to fathom because it seems to me that opening up a discussion on the country's future is actually about decentralising influence and power and about bringing together political and civil society. Never mind. Leading the most recent resistance, and what may well torpedo the president's initiative, are the Thabo Mbeki Foundation and the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation, the Steve Biko Foundation, the Chief Albert Luthuli Foundation, the FW de Klerk Foundation, the Oliver and Adelaide Tambo Foundation, and the Strategic Dialogue Group. At first glance, the new resistance projects an image of loyal criticism in the sense that they believe, for sure, that something ought to be done, and that they would like to be part of that something if the necessary changes and improvements are made. Closer scrutiny suggests that there may be a loss of the spirit of compromise with which Mbeki and the late former president FW de Klerk (and Ramaphosa, in particular) were familiar. It's all rather confusing. It's a bit like trying to figure out how something or someone can be all over the place at the same time. We have to wait and see what emerges. What I want to discuss is the idea of compromise, and of bringing the opposition into the room. The Mbeki-De Klerk non-compromise A long time ago, during the latter stages of the Codesa negotiations, I had a chat with former president De Klerk about compromise in politics and about its gains and losses. Regardless of what I (many of us) thought at the time, De Klerk believed he had made the greatest compromises, first, with his 'own people' about ending legal apartheid, and then with the ANC in the final months of the negotiations process. The conversation ended on a sobering note. 'You don't have to tell me about making compromises,' De Klerk said. And so I was surprised that the foundations of former presidents Mbeki and De Klerk were among the refuseniks. They would at least understand that Ramaphosa's initiative was somewhat of an acknowledgement that the ANC-led state had lost the power and will to steer South Africa, and that it sought to forge stronger alliances with civil society. All the more surprising was that the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation withdrew. They would represent civil society with a little less political baggage than the Mbeki and De Klerk foundations. Then again, the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation probably endorsed the (political) compromises that created the current Government of National Unity. The objective of that compromise, it seemed to me, was by and large to maintain the political and economic status quo that took shape after 1994. To the extent, then, that the envisaged National Dialogue included the main parties that gave us concepts like ' sufficient consensus ' in the early 1990s, one may be forgiven for believing that the Mbeki and De Klerk foundations would, at least, enter into preliminary discussions on the National Dialogue. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas Let's try to think harder about negotiations, bargaining and more honest discussions among political and social society. Bringing together political society and social society — all interested parties — into a room to discuss a way forward does not always guarantee optimal outcomes. As the tired idiom has it: turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Let's try a more sophisticated example, grounded in reality (turkeys don't actually vote, nè). Imagine a village, somewhere in Central America, that is plagued by crime, gender-based violence and drug abuse. A leader of the village suggests a 'dialogue' about crime, gender-based violence and drug abuse, and invites everyone into a hall to discuss what is wrong and what ought to be done about it. One suggestion is that the local municipality installs high-mast lighting as a way to curb criminal activities at night. Now, among the invited, for the sake of democracy, representation and inclusivity, are criminals who have an interest in darkness. Criminals thrive on operating in the dark. The initiative to install high-mass lighting fails because there is no consensus. The criminal elements on the guest list of civil society vote against high-mast lighting. It is at this point that the local leaders can simply go ahead and authorise installation of the high-mass lighting by some decree or authoritarianism, or on the basis of 'sufficient consensus', or by asking the criminals to vote against their interests. What will it be? What should it be? I just don't know. I return to the befuddlement of a political superposition — trying to figure out how something or someone can be all over the place at the same time. Nobody knows what will happen next. I don't know what will happen next. But because I don't know what will happen next, does not mean everyone else does not know what will happen next. Maybe somebody does know what will happen next. I think I mangled a line from the film The Milagro Beanfield War, but it works, kinda. For now, we remain in stasis — what has become South Africa's original position. DM
![[WATCH] ‘We will be direct and honest' – Cyril Ramaphosa at the National Convention](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia-cache.primedia-service.com%2Fmedia%2Fvvuidpcf%2Fwhatsapp-image-2025-08-15-at-161022.jpeg%3Fwidth%3D1200%26height%3D630&w=3840&q=100)
![[WATCH] ‘We will be direct and honest' – Cyril Ramaphosa at the National Convention](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic-mobile-files.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com%2Feyewn.png&w=48&q=75){kind=small}
Eyewitness News
an hour ago
- Eyewitness News
[WATCH] ‘We will be direct and honest' – Cyril Ramaphosa at the National Convention
JOHANNESBURG - President Cyril Ramaphosa delivered the opening address at the National Dialogue, a platform aimed at fostering inclusive discussions around South Africa's pressing socio-economic and political issues. Ramaphosa acknowledged that 'many things are broken' in the country, setting the tone for a series of conversations meant to address national challenges and develop collaborative solutions. The dialogue brings together leaders from civil society, government, and various sectors to chart a path forward for the nation.
